Legal Opinion
Robusto v. Johnson
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 22, 1976PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdward O. Provenzano, J.
Defendants, pursuant to CPLR 3211, have moved for dismissal of plaintiffs’ complaint the gravamen of which is negligence, on the ground that plaintiffs commenced their actions more than three years after the causes of action accrued. Plaintiffs, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd [b]), have cross-moved to dismiss that part of defendants’ answer which interposes an affirmative defense alleging that plaintiffs’ actions are barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations.
Factually, it appears that plaintiffs’ causes of action accrued on September 30, 1972 upon the happening of an automobile accident.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Victorson v. Bock Laundry Machine Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1975
- Rivera v. Berkeley Super Wash, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1974
- Golia v. Health Insurance PlanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1958
- Golia v. Health Insurance Plan of Greater New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1960
- Bailey v. RoatNew York Supreme Court · 1942
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Willey v. BrownSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978
- Anderson v. Lutheran Deaconess HospitalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Robinson v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1979
- Brunotte v. HansAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- Liebowitz v. B. Berglass, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1979